Governments...Why aren't there new ones.

Being kind of new here I have been thinking of a good first question to throw out there so as to make a decent first impression. So let’s hope it flies Orville…

Why the hell aren’t there any new government types? We have democracy (and all the variants), republic, communism, socialism, fascism, dictatorship, monarchy, feudalism, oligarchy, etc…(tell me if I missed some). But there hasn’t been a new “name” in a long time.

You can’t just call China communist anymore and you can’t just call the US simply a democracy…

I think we need some ideas here folks.

I hereby propose Mechocracy. Government by Artificial Intelligence.

I like that one. God forbid though…

So what would you call the US. It’s definitely got its democratic aspects. Many republicans would state that it’s become more of a socialist state since the 60’s and I know that many liberals think its a corrupt oligarchy.

Doesn’t anyone think that it’s knind of weird that there hasn’t been any new gtitles for govts in the last half of this century.

Still confused.

PS I remember one type I missed. Do you guys remeber the beginning of Monty Python and the Holy Grail when the peasant babbles on about an “anarcho syndicate collective” or something of the like…

I think there aren’t any new ones because folks are too busy trying to tweak with the ones already in existance.

As far as the U.S. goes, we weren’t suppose to be a democracy in the first place. You show me the word democracy in the Constitiution! We were suppose to be a constitutional republic. If we’ve learned anything in the last 50 years it’s that Socialism, Communism, & Democracy don’t work!

I knew somebody was going to check me on my lingo. My fault. Constitutional republic. I was lazy.

The “Lottocracy”–sell chances to control the government for, say, 20 bucks a piece.

First Prize–The Presidency of the United States.

Second Prize–The Vice Presidency of the United States.

100 Third Prizes–seats in the United States Senate.

435 Fourth Prizes–seats in the United States House of Representatives.

10,000 Fifth Prizes–$100 gift certificates from WalMart.

For that matter, we could do the same for Cabinet posts and federal judgeships. Make everything a one-year term, so as to increase the excitement.

Sure, the wealthy will buy more chances, and thus have more chances to win. But you never know–folks like us might get lucky.

(I apologize for joking about the OP, but I can’t think of any form of government that wouldn’t fall into the ones described. Except possibly for anarchy, but that’s not a form of government at all.)

There’s only so many ways you can define government, most governments are a mix like the US.

Electing Representatives: Democracy

Legislative Bodies: Oligarchy

President: Monarchy

might as well add:

Lobbying process: Aristocracy

Hey, that’s a DEMOCRATIC constitutional republic. We don’t have a strict republican form.

I’ve heard the term “kleptocracy” being batted around of late, usually refering to modern Russia and it’s massive mafia influence and power. Of course, that’s more of an “anarchic republican democracy” than anything.

With the possible exception of socialism, there hasn’t really been a new form of government in . . . in a mighty long time. When did the Athenian democracy come to the fore? And one could certainly argue that socialism is basically a democracy with some particular economic policies.

Can anyone actually think of a new form of government that seems plausible? What would you term what Plato described in “Republic”? Philocracy?

-VarlosZ

How about “Randomocracy”?: The Prez, VP, and members of Congress are selected randomly from their respective states. Every one only gets 1 term, too.

Lockstockocracy.

a.k.a government by Nick Moran.

The cabinet consists of British film-makers with such a paucity of ideas that their policies consists solely of remaking '60s Brit gangster flicks.

Thanks Varlos. I was wondering what you would term a place like Russia… I have an idea and a question.

What about a collective/hive mind in which all of us are connected organically and each puts a tiny fraction towards making the decision for the body whole? Something similar to the borg from star trek. Yeah, it sounds bizarre, but it’s all I could think of now.

Question…What do you call a place like the UK? It has the Parliament and the Monarchy (I know they formally signed their power away).
OOOOOOHHH!!! I got one!!! Theocracy! I guess you could toss some of the Middle Eastern states and the Vatican into that category.

The UK is a constitutional monarchy. Note that it has a constitution, but it is not written down (!)

“Kleptocracy” is usually used to refer to the situation where the state is the thief, as opposed to Russia where the theft is mainly private sector. Russia seems close to feudalism to me. Nigeria under its recent military dictorship, Indonesia under Suharto and most notably Zaire (now the Dem Rep of Congo) under Mobuto (sp?) are those countries most frequently referred to as Kleptocratic.

A term that has been missed is “crony capitalism” which some have applied to Indonesia, Malaysia and Japan.

picmr

The UK is a constitutional monarchy in name only. As you say, there’s no actual constitution, and the monarchy officially has no power at all. I’d refer to it as a parliamentary (sp?) democracy/republic.

Russia close to feudalism? Hmm . . . that’s a stretch. I prefer a corrupt democratic republic w/ anarchic tendencies. But that’s me. Also, what exactly do you mean by “crony capitalism”? I think I see what you’re getting at, but Japan doesn’t seem to fit (of course, I could have no idea what you’re talking about).

FEUDALISM: You have two cows. Your lord takes some of the milk.

PURE SOCIALISM: You have two cows. The government takes them and puts them in a barn with everyone else’s cows. You have to take care of all the cows. The government gives you a glass of milk.

BUREAUCRATIC SOCIALISM: Your cows are cared for by former chicken farmers. You have to take care of the chickens the government took from the chicken farmers. The government gives you as much milk and eggs the rules say you should need.

FASCISM: You have two cows. The government takes both, hires you to take care of them, and sells you the milk.

PURE COMMUNISM: You share two cows with your neighbors. You and your neighbors bicker about who has the most “ability” and who has the most “need.” Meanwhile, no one works, no one gets any milk, and the cows drop dead of starvation.

RUSSIAN COMMUNISM: You have two cows. You take care of them but the government takes all the milk. You steal back as much milk as you can and sell it on the black market.

PERESTROIKA: You have two cows. You have to take care of them, but the Mafia takes all the milk. You steal back as much milk as you can and sell it on the “free” market.

CAMBODIAN COMMUNISM: You have two cows. The government takes both and shoots you.

DICTATORSHIP: You have two cows. The government takes both and drafts you.

PURE DEMOCRACY: You have two cows. Your neighbor decides who gets the milk.

REPRESENTATIVE DEMOCRACY: You have two cows. Your neighbors pick someone to tell you who gets the milk.

BUREAUCRACY: You have two cows. At first the government regulates what you can feed them and when you can milk them. Then it pays you not to milk them. Then it takes both, shoots one, milks the other and pours the milk down the drain. Then it requires you to fill out forms
accounting for the missing cow.

CAPITALISM: You don’t have any cows. The bank will not lend you money to buy cows because you don’t have any cows to put up as collateral.

PURE ANARCHY: You have two cows. Either you sell the milk at a fair price, or your neighbors try to take the cows and kill you.

ANARCHO-CAPITALISM: You have two cows. You sell one and buy a bull.

SURREALISM: You have two giraffes. The government requires you to take harmonica lessons.

OLYMPICS-ISM: You have two cows, one American, one Chinese. With the help of trilling violins and state-of-the-art montage photography, John Tesh narrates the moving tale of how the American cow overcame the agony of growing up in a suburb with divorced parents, then mentions in passing that the Chinese cow was beaten every day by a tyrannical farmer and saw its parents butchered before its eyes. The American cow wins the competition, severely spraining an udder in a
gritty performance, and gets a multi-million-dollar contract to endorse Wheaties. The Chinese cow is led out of the arena and shot by Chinese government officials though no one ever hears about it. McDonald’s buys the meat and serves it hot and fast at its Beijing restaurant.

X-FILES-ISM: Your two cows turn out to be the government. They milk YOU. You are saved by two generic bimbos, a female and a male with blow-dried hair, after (1) a car chase, involving UFOs, (2) a gunfight, and (3) a seance. The aliens get the advertising revenue after the Nielsens rise.

Crony capitalism refers to a situation in which the leader of a country plays favorites in granting the ownership of businesses, monopoly over industries, rights to natural resources, positions of power, etc. to his cronies. In the case of Indonesia it is/was pretty flagrant. Suharto’s family controlled/controls the vast majority of the wealth (note: which is why it wasn’t such a big deal for Suahrto himself to step down.) In Japan it was a bit more complicated. i am not sure it’s completely fair to label it as solely crony capitalism though that deinitely described some parts of the govt.

How do we know the queen has no official power? Because that is agreed to be the constitutional position. It’s bizarre, but even though it is not written down, constitutional issues do matter in the UK.

In Australia we are a constitutional monarchy and a parliamentary democracy. And the queen’s representative has been known to dismiss the head of government.

picmr

North Korea could be known as a necrocracy, since Kim Il-sung remains (or, his remains remain) the head of state.

Here are a few more new governments for you…

Bestiocracy: If I could walk with the animals, talk with the animals, I could havbe my state governed by the animals…

Sitcommunism: The country is run by whoever has the most Neilsen ratings. Watch for a war during sweeps week!

Procrastinocracy: Whenever a major decision needs to be made, we just wait around and hope someone else will do it.

Docracy: Only those with medical degrees are allowed governmental positions. Also: Dentocracy.

Simocracy: People wanting the seat of power must all play SimCity 3000 (or, alternately, Civilization/Alpha Centauri) and whoever’s sim world is the best gets to rule. No fair using auto-budget!

and… of course…

Cecilocracy: The teeming millions finally get off their butts and elect the one man REALLY suited to running things, Unka Cecil.

Of course, certain conspiracies will arise that the new Cecilocracy is actualy an Edocracy, but that’s why Slug Signorino will be heading the secret police.

Since Russia is my thing, I have to leap in here. Any Russian oligarch worth his salt would be insulted if you were insinuate that his massive graft was purely private sector. High state office and ill-gotten cash in Russia go together like peanut butter and jelly.

On the issue of the lack of new forms of government, I’d suggest that once you have classifications set up, it’s easy to shoehorn anything else that shows up into the existing terminology.

For example, Aristotle set up a six-part division of political systems, based on three good systems and their three deviant forms. The three systems were defined as rule by one (monarchy with deviant form tyranny), rule by few (aristocracy with deviant form oligarchy), and rule by many (for lack of a better term, healthy property-owning democracy with deviant form mob rule).

Once you’ve got categories like that set up, you can mix and match and make about any particular system fit into that schema.

A wise man, Max Weber I believe, coined the term bureaucracy to refer to a de facto government by public agencies. That is, specialists in various government departments make some or all of the most important day-to-day decisions. Lately that term has has been used to describe those bureaus and their personnel - kind of an odd process, when you think about it. I mean, cut the “-cracy” off the end of the popularized term and you get roughly the same thing, only with a more cynical connotation. But I digress.

A more modern variation on the term is technocracy. Folks in government agencies who are super-specialized, and you high-tech stuff (computers, operations research, public policy analysis) to help make decisions, as well as promulgate, explain, and defend them. First example of actual technocrats I think would be Robert McNamara’s civilian “whiz kids” at the Department of Defense. Recent examples of technocratic decisions would be various policies on indoor air pollution by cigarettes at the Environmental Protection Agency, which hinged on various statistical tests, chemical analysis, etc.

Neither of these forms negates earlier forms of government. A modern state “collects” differing forms of government as it gets more complex, with none completely overwhelming the older ones. Here are some examples of government ideals mixed into the American political soup:

judicial oligarchy - A fairly narrow class of judges makes some of the most important, far-reaching decisions (Roe v. Wade, Brown v. Board of Education, anti-trust stuff). It’s not a democratic process, but it’s not supposed to be. It should exist only as a check on democratic process, and is accepted when it is limited to that.

democracy - Just what you think it is. It exists. Initiatives and elections. Elected officials pay attention to public opinion if they want to keep their jobs. This is representative democracy. It is a true but incomplete description of our politics.

technocracy - The EPA, Defense agencies, local police departments, OSHA … they all make decisions based on numeric, technical, and scientific information.

aristocracy - The Kennedys do not all have equal talent or vision, yet they are almost all very successful at getting elected. Coincidence?

autocracy - Presidents have consistently violated the War Powers Act and gotten away with it. Interestingly, it is the absence of intervention from the judicial oligarchy, not from democracy, which has allowed this.

multiple competing plutocracies - Also known as “iron triangles”. The modern state is complex enough that the average citizen has no opinion on many matters. In the absence of overwhelming public opinion, the few with strong interests in a matter dominate policy on that matter. They concentrate whatever funds they have on the members of the relevant Congressional committee. There is no single “money trust” that holds all the power; the single monolithic combine is a fantasy of conspiracy theorists. If it did exist, there wouldn’t be intense budget struggles every year. There are many monied interests, none strong enough to prevail against contrary public opinion. These interests prevail because there is generally no public opinion on the vast majority of policy questions. “Mrs. Jones, should we deploy our intercontinental ballistic missiles in dense-pack hardened silos, or on mobile rail-based launchers?”